Australia Federal Election 2010: Modern vs Traditional Prime Minister

The 3-yearly-party of democratic election has been called. On 21 August 2010, Australian all over the world will elect a new Prime Minister (the current Prime Minister is not elected). Yes, it’s the classic battle between Labor versus Liberal, but also between modern versus traditional leader. Which one to choose ?….

Well, it’s not presidential election, so technically the Aussie will not directly choose their Prime Minister. They will choose the local member of parliament that belong to a party or an independent. The majority member will form a government that has been nominated before. So, if you want a Labor Prime Minister, then vote for Labor candidate nominated for your local neighborhood, and vice versa.

The real drawback of this system that quite annoying (at least for me) was what happen with PM Kevin Rudd: the labor party faction decides that Kevin Rudd is a liability that has to be replaced. So, it did – a few people initiative was able to replace a Prime Minister that not even 3 years ago has successfully win the election toppling the previous government that has ruled Australia for more than a decade. For me, at least for Prime Minister position, which is the one running the country, there should be more difficult procedure to replace the office.

Anyway, back to the topic, what do you think the would be Prime-Minister-elect below.

Modern vs Traditional – who will win

Let’s compare side by side the two leader of the party that would become prime minister:

Julia Gillard vs Tony Abbott For PM

Julia Gillard

Tony Abbott

Birthplace:

Wales, UK

London, UK

Birthday:

29 Sep 61

4 Nov 57

Party:

Labor

Liberal

Status:

De-facto

Married

Religion:

No religion

Roman Catholic

The Modern

The Traditional

Domestically, many parents and Christian group voice concern about Julia as role model. Not only admitting publicly that she doesn’t belief in God and religion, but she’s also not married and living together as de-facto couple with her partner.

Tony on the other hand, not only still go to the church every week, he also said publicly that he wants her daughters to be still virgin on wedding day. Something that is quite rare in western world. Also, as a politician, he is super duper fit – recently at 52 years old he still can finish an Ironman Triathlon (that is 3.8 km swimming, 180 km cycling and 42 km running in a day – he finished it under 15 hours – try this if you can !!)

Despite that, poll showed that Julia is significantly very popular as PM candidate to Tony by far. (mid July 2010’s poll: 57% prefer Julia vs 27% for Tony as PM). I guess not only she is a good looking red head woman, but also as the first female PM for Australia – which completes the dominance of female leadership in this country.

The only common denomination between both is that they are both migrant and born overseas !

So, between the modern and the traditional, which one you choose ?

Current Government:

One of the major achievement that can be boasted about is that Kevin Rudd government has saved Australia from GFC (Global Financial Crisis). During the worldwide downturn, Australia has never entered a recession. Thanks to the quick action from government with its economic stimulus.

Some people scream that Labor has plunged Australia into debt. I can say straight that these people are 101% wrong and most likely they don’t know anything about macro economics. It is true that before GFC, Australian Federal Government has no debt. But if there is indication of recession where private sector stop spending, the government need to step in go into debt and stimulates the economy. They have no choice, that’s the only way – any government will do this.
The debt itself ? Again some people who whinge about debt, it’s screaming that they don’t know anything about finance. (They maybe ridicoulously scare about debt , have never study and understand debt and need further education) – Australia debt will peak at $153 billion at around 2013 . Looks big? No at all, Last year Australia GDP is $1.2trillion or $1200 billion, and with growth to 2013, the debt will be around 10% of GDP (Gross national Product). This is comparable to if you have $500,000 home and got a mortgage of $50,000. Really small and manageable. So, do not worry a single blink about Australia debt.
For further comparison, the European country that recently have problems with debt (Spain, Greece, etc) has debt of up to around 200% of their GDP, of course this is problem – but not with Australia)

However, the debt money that government spend could have much better impact if it being spent with more control: 2 big mess are the home insulation program and the BER (Building Education Revolution).The home insulation scheme lack of check and control where scammer and unqualified people can claim as insulator, receive money from government and install dogy insulation at home all across Australia. Not only rorting the scheme, but also responsible of many house fire due to technical matter.
Almost similar, the BER is practically giving money to school all over Australia to renovate or build new building. The problem is there is no control where the builder and/or the school giving a ridiculously high quote, but still get the money. For example: to make covered outdoor learning area in school, usually costs somewhere under $80,000 but some school can get it ballooned to $950,000 without any question.
For both bungles, I fully understand that quick response is essential (hence not much rules/procedure can be fully established) but it can easily much better run if the government delegate the operation into the respected industrial body on each field. Not only they have more experience and visibility of the norm, government can sue back the money if they proven to be rorting the government. But instead both scheme were handled by government directly. This is not acceptable.

Asylum seeker/Refugee matter: I believe without doubt, this government has failed to maintain preventing the low rate of illegal immigrant, especially the one come from illegal boat, come to Australia. This is the comparison: the last 2 terms of previous government (from 2001 – 2007) the averages is 4 boat a year with average of 48 people per year. But, just 2009, there were 59 illegal boats with 2750 people on it. (see http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/BoatArrivals.htm for more statistic)
I fully believe refugee need to be helped and Australia should help generously, but the way they come to Australia, I don’t really agree with. The problem with this is some of these “refugee” allegedly fly to Indonesia or other neighboring country before embarking on a boat coordinated by “people smuggler”. Some pay thousands of dollars just to get in the crappy boat. So, some of them are not genuine refugee and unfortunately no way (or very hard) to prove this 100%.

The fact that Australia is not in the direct vicinity of the conflict area (Afghanistan, Middle East, etc) then all refugee intake should be the ones coordinated by UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) not by illegal people smuggler. The message need to be clear, anybody claim themselve as refugee need to be endorsed by UNHCR – the rest will be met by harder law. This is to prevent blooming business of people smuggler. It is really different if for example there is conflict in Indonesia or East Timor, then boat people from this direct neighbor will be likely a genuine refugee.

This government has upset the mining community: the very industrial sector that made dodging GFC possible. Super profit tax or whatever the name should not be applied to mining company. Yes, they have huge profit, but also remember that they also contribute huge infra structure (railway, roads, township,etc) of otherwise just tiny rural town. Not to mention capital and infrastructure to do the mining itself. If the government want to have extra tax, apply this Super Profit tax to bank. The banks is not capital hungry they just provide service, mostly now automatid by computer, but yet their profit will be astronomically high if compared with the capital required.

To be franked, I am not really Labor supporter. But with all the above, I would think they didn’t do any big mishap. With the Liberals did not have much different policy anyway, I would say, let Labor continue govern this country, mainly to clean their own mess!

Well, the way democracy works, an opinion of one person does not really matter. The majority will rule. Happy election !

About The Author

Denis Kristanda is Bridge aficionado, entrepreneur, coach, manufacturing professional. Living in Sydney, Australia, he migrated from Indonesia since 2001. Father of a daughter and a boy, he is also a keen trader and photographer.

3 Comments

masealake
on 1 Oct 10 at 15:34

What democratic societies should learn lessen from Australia election 2010:
1. What productive action has PM Julia Gillard in office 100 days?
The Australia historical hung parliament demonstrated the big gap of inequality society between the small educated elite groups who get highest pay by talk feast used mouth work controlling live essential resources of the country in every social platforms against the biggest less educated groups who get lowest pay by hands work squeezed by discriminative policies that sucking live blood from individual poor/less wealth off?
Voters’ voices do not hear?
Voters’ pains do not ease?
Voters’ cries do not care?
1. Poverty will not be phase out if no fairer resources to share;
2. Illness will not be reducing if no preventive measurement in real action;
3. Agriculture will not be revitalize if urbanization continuing its path;
4. Housing affordability will not be reach for young generation if government continues cashing from young generation debt by eating out the whole cake of education export revenue without plough back;
5. Manufacture industry will shrink smaller and smaller if no new elements there to power up to survive;
6. Employability will not in the sustainable mode for so long as manufacture and agriculture not going to boost.
When inflation is a looming threat, with the nation’s CPI growing by 3.5 per cent year on year – a 22-month high – just last month. When ultimately slow down the country’s growth and subsequently hose down the demand for Australian commodities.
Ma kee wai
(Member of Inventor Association Queensland since 1993)

Australia citizens now enter a very challenging political era for 70 years in the 2010 federal election, many reforms are demanding by voters are looking for a change with anger to share fairer resources supplied lives from the first term of government?

Voters handed down their decisive votes during election time are looking for an efficient, effective and economically run government. A high transparency in less mistaken caused processing under no discriminately enforced services government. A long term wealth creative vision with fast action moving forward progressing resulting value add to voters benefits in each term of governing.

Voters are crying for action right now to have improved resources support lives that suppose lead by a government in the following eight commitments:

1. What vision of prosperity voters seen?
2. Why action not enough in the past 3 years?
3. How many election promises has been fulfilled?
4. Where productivity motivation to voters?
5. What materials to speed up election promises processing?
6. Why some election promises in powerless process?
7. How far transparency in each department service voters wanted?
8. Where prioritized direction to empowerment the nation?

This is an interesting / challenging article considering the upcoming Federal election. How does a Christian decide where to cast their vote when an election is looming? It is not simply a matter of placing ticks in boxes on a ballot paper and hoping your chosen candidate wins their seat.
A person with the right to vote in an election also carries a very real responsibility/obligation to ensure that their vote is not wasted, or ‘bartered’ away in some back room deal. They need to know what policies their chosen candidate and their political party stand upon.